You said that you send the PRIVATE keys to a printing company. I'm sorry but if that's the case your OPSEC needs to be revisited. If I misunderstood than all good.
Even if I made these labels myself, I would end up seeing your private keys. This applies to any project, I chose this method deliberately because there have been less reports about stolen physical Bitcoin, or compromised keys, than hacked exchanges, security issues with hardware wallets and all those things. If you want the masses to adopt Bitcoin, you have to create a method that they can use. Once users have to "generate" anything, it becomes a niche thing. Don't forget, this is supposed to be a piggy bank containing 10€, not your main wealth account. Though you are correct in theory, in practice you are exposing your company's name/reputation to unnecessary risk as opposed to internally generating these keys. It sure would be frustrating to have a theft happen due to a security flaw at the printing company - a variable that could have been well within your control. Please dont take this as a flame, I'd like to see this product succeed and am offering a critique based on a flawed methodology that supposedly brought theft onto a now defunct coinmaker (Alitin). This ^ also, if you are US based selling them previously loaded may run you a foul of anti-money laundering laws. Most companies require users to provide identity details and load them after delivery to get around this. A better model IMO would be to sell them unloaded and perhaps work out a deal with a 3rd party to load them if at all. |
|
|
|
I do know many people from my country that use this forum as their only source of income. This website is very popular among our internet cafes and I started to read more about this forum. The thing is a lot of jobs don't pay enough and people are looking for a way out. Do you feel empathy for these people or do you think this forum shouldn't be for money?
I think most people here who use the forum welcome people who want to earn income here as long as they are not fraudulent, don't disrupt the function of the forum, and provide useful goods or services. If you can do those 3 things you should be well accepted here even if your only purpose is to earn an income. |
|
|
|
Your "Chippendale Coder" profile pictured on twitter is really not sexy. Just sayin'.
Welcome aboard.
No, but it is fucking hilarious. |
|
|
|
However if the data itself is in fact immutable on the blockchain
AFAICT it's not, the public blockchain aspect is just the lino coin's ledger. It's a bog-standard centralized service, but with a (also-centralized) cryptocoin to go along with it. A sort of halfway-reasonable design would be putting a minimal amount of content metadata in their chain and then storing the data on IPFS, but even that would be inferior in most ways to just using Freenet, which was released over a decade ago. It's annoying to see these "blockchain!!!" people poorly reinventing the wheel. (BTW, I wrote a while ago about an idea for censorship-resistant datastore which would be suitable for this sort of thing.) If they placed links in the coin message area, to locations where their material is located on the Net, wouldn't this work? Or am I misunderstanding the whole thing?  This still is an improvement by having a system outside of all of the media monopolies regardless of all of these very valid criticisms. It is a huge step in the right direction and will lead to not only a larger user base for these types of systems, but increasing competition for companies to make the next best thing that goes even further. It is only a matter of time now. |
|
|
|
He's not a US citizen though right? I don't know why he would be subject to US rules simply because he exposed them.
LOL citizenship of a person doesn't exclude them from breaking US law. "Hacking" the United States of America "servers/infrastructure" is a crime in the US even if you weren't born there, never been there, can't point to it on a map or anything else... I worded that poorly, meant more along the lines of me not understanding why he's being arrested if his only part in this is distributing the material. Though if he did play a role in actually hacking the USA, then he should go to jail for it -- even if he did expose the horrible things people did, we don't want to make heroes out of those that hack governments. Eh? I think this is at the center of the conflict here, at least apparently according to the information in the public domain. Even if Trump wants to pardon him, he is kind of in a catch 22 because regardless of how responsibly he may have done it, not prosecuting him would send a very bad message and lead to our intelligence networks leaking like a sieve. I agree if he was acting purely in a journalist capacity then he should not be prosecuted, but it seems there may be other happenings leading to this event that we may not be privy to. This is a very complicated situation regardless of how straight forward people may seem to think it is. EDIT: More information has come to light https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20190411/06134041977/julian-assange-arrested-behalf-us-trying-to-help-manning-crack-cia-password.shtml |
|
|
|
Those who say so are mistaken. It is just a religion, very peaceful.
I have a few friends of Masulman, they are very friendly.
It is also a political system. What you are saying there is known as "anecdotal information" IE not statistically relevant. |
|
|
|
Narrowly interpreted cherry picked rambling shot gunning of sources Cool interpretation bro. You keep up the good fight of being a supremacist. |
|
|
|
Not surprising, but sad. Assange is one of the original cypherpunks.
What's surprising is how long it took. I wonder what other underlying motives there are at play here, if any. The only thing I am sure of after monitoring Wikileaks from day 1 is this whole narrative is packed full of ulterior motives. It is hard to even say which way us up at this point. |
|
|
|
No you're clearly not advocating for anything.
You're a psychopath.
But you're not alone, tons of people here agree with you. Just happy you have a country on your own.
You're all just saying "it's ok to mutilate someone if they pushed you"
Wahou.
For fuck's sake that's not something difficult to understand!
If you insult me and I push you, should you have the right to kill me? Or mutilate me?
Yes or no question. Nothing else. If I am clearly not advocating for anything, why did you state I am advocating for something? A more important question is do you have the right to push (physically assault) some one? No? In that case this is the genesis of the criminal activity, and therefore legally the responsible party. I have just one question for you... Did you stop beating your wife? Yes or no question. Nothing else. |
|
|
|
In case anyone is wondering.. Dalam ajaran islam tidak di ajarkan seseorang menjadi teroris, islam mengajarkan sopansantun, kasih sayang daritadinya pemukul menjadi perangkul, munkin ini adalah sebagian kelompok yg benci terhadap islam.
Says tidak setuju islam dikatakan agama teroris.
Google translated from Indonesian: "In Islamic teachings not taught by someone to be a terrorist, Islam teaches sopansantun, affection from being a hitter becomes a hijacker, but this is probably a group that hates Islam. Says do not agree that Islam is said to be a terrorist religion." What you have shown with your last post is you do not even know your own Christian mythology. Socialist doctrine is based on the Christian ideology. You got this backwards.
Do you even know what my position is?
Are you sure you questioned the atheist position? Where are your arguments to prove that the supernatural exists? Here is your chance to win the Nobel Prize. Let's go.
You are an opinionated, Christian Anarchist who disagrees with everything he sees or hears. You are just an automaton with no original critical thinking skills, IMHO. No, I am pretty sure I do know quite a bit about Christian mythology, but I would love to see you source the information that you think proves Socialism/Communism was based upon it. There is actually a lot of evidence however Communism was at least partially based upon the Talmud, not just because of a lot of overlapping ideologies, but because of Karl Marx's lineage from a long line of rabbis as well as a few other things related to The Bolshevik Revolution. You have made your position as a holier than thou edgy boi atheist pretty clear so, I don't know why I wouldn't know your position at this point. Do you even know my position? You have no problem calling me a Christian Anarchist, when I never said anything of the sort. Frankly I think Anarchists are short sighted people who are usually just Socialists and Communists anyway, but they don't know enough about either of those systems to know any better, they just think Anarchism sounds more edgy and they have a cool logo which makes a great patch to put next to their Black Flag or Misfits patches. Again, you seem to be fixated on wanting to discuss the validity of belief, as I already stated, I consider the debate of the validity of having religious beliefs themselves one way or the other to be an asinine task, also one that is not the subject of this thread, so take it to the atheism thread edgy boi. |
|
|
|
The polarization has reached to such level that a person is chased for practising his right to free speech and just because he was chased he decided to effing cut off his hand! Assaulted, then chased. It's against the law to have a sword like that with you though. I have no problem with him being charged with having the sword, but by no means should he be charged for defending himself from assault.
Also, he is not the perpetrator here regardless of his possession of contraband. |
|
|
|
Thank you for providing even more evidence you don't have two brain cells to rub together to form a cogent reply. I can't blame you though, you would probably stop breathing if you stopped to think that long.
Dude you're advocating the right for someone to MUTILATE someone else if they dare pushing you. What do you want? You're even worse than Islamist fundamentalist. Even Sharia law doesn't allow that. I am not advocating for anything. I am stating the FACT that in The United States of America, if some one physically assaults you, you have the CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to use force against them to stop the assault. He was assaulted, he attempted to flea, he was chased. What do you want him to do just stand there and let these people beat him? Would they stop at just beating on him or would they go further? He had no way of knowing. You don't get to assault people then cry when they defend themselves, sorry. |
|
|
|
First of all no one was killed. Second of all, if some one can not control themselves and assaults another person, use of force is ENTIRELY JUSTIFIED under the law in the United States, but probably not in your country where you are a subject without the right to self defense.
Thank you for proving you're a crazy asshole. Thank you for providing even more evidence you don't have two brain cells to rub together to form a cogent reply. I can't blame you though, you would probably stop breathing if you stopped to think that long. Better safe than sorry. |
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QXSefWYsyEThis subject is one I am not sure where I stand on. If he is a genuine leaker with no ulterior motives then I am not for this, but there are reasons to suspect he is really a CIA or other intelligence agency asset based on his past arrest and work history. There are many reasons to suspect he may have ulterior motives that would serve the "deep state" narrative. What do you think?
|
|
|
|
A brand new account creates a thread to complain about trust system giving zero information in topic and thread slowly become another " lauda discussion" thread. Classic sockpuppeting  OP if you don't mind, point us to your account, I would like to see reason behind this thread. Considering that Lauda is proud of the fact they hand out mass negative ratings assembly line style, bringing up Lauda is quite appropriate. |
|
|
|
I'm mentally ill... Thanks for the wonderful quote. At least we can agree on something. I will cherish this. |
|
|
|
What is some one on the street who was just assaulted by one or more people he does not know and then chased supposed to assume, that they just wanted to have a little chat with him? He was assaulted, he tried to get away from the assailant(s), they chased him. Self defense is perfectly justified. He was in fact physically assaulted, hitting someones head to knock of his hat is assault, this is where the criminal activity began. This is an illegal form of physical aggression unless you are insinuating they yelled loud enough to make his hat fly off. I have no problem with him being charged with having the sword, but by no means should he be charged for defending himself from assault.
Following your explanation, I just have to insult you and your mother and wife strong and long enough to make you angry enough so you push me then I can cut your hand with a sword. If you don't see a problem here, you're the problem. Words are not physical assault. Hitting some one is. Try again fat man. Can you read? I said that following your explanations, I just have to provoke you into pushing me so I have the right to kill you. Or mutilate you at least. If someone start insulting me and my loved ones in front of me there is a 80% chance I will assault him physically. Everyone with a grain of dignity would do that. So in your world, I could kill ANYONE just by insulting them enough so they push me around, then I would be justified to cut their limbs of. You're really a dangerous person! First of all no one was killed. Second of all, if some one can not control themselves and assaults another person, use of force is ENTIRELY JUSTIFIED under the law in the United States, but probably not in your country where you are a subject without the right to self defense. |
|
|
|
Just because you wave your magic comtard wand and pretend I presented no valid logical arguments does not make it a fact. I guess it is just a convenient side effect that you don't have to actually respond to any of those arguments right?
What argument? That Marxism is based on mental illness? You call that an argument? xD I don't know why you are bringing up 1984, but Eric Arthur Blair also wrote a book called "Animal Farm" which was entirely a critique of Communism so, it makes sense some of the same themes would be in 1984. We all know you love Oui-Oui, no need to shout about it from the mountain tops.
Well I brought that up because you already accused me of not having read it. And seeing Animal Farm as a critique of communism is REALLY reading the book in a childish manner. Communism is just an environment here. Orwell never really cared about the economic system behind, it was much more about mass and language manipulation. Both 1984 and Animal Farm are about that, not about communism... I don't know who you think you are convincing with your lackadaisical pathetic excuse for dismissing several valid arguments, but I assure you it is only working for you and your Comtard friends. It is a well accepted fact that Animal Farm was a critique of Communism, but why make a logical argument when you can just declare the point "childish" and continue to tell yourself you are correct? Once again, Communism is also a political and social ideology, not just an economic theory, but you certainly know that about your own preferred ideology right? |
|
|
|
Marx himself defined Communism/Socialism as the antithesis which requires the thesis of Capitalism to be created.
"What we have to deal with here is a communist society, not as it has developed on its own foundations, but on the contrary, just as it emerges from capitalist society: which is thus in every respect still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges." -Karl MarxFurthermore one of those is my statement, and one is a quote from Karl Marx, so even IF the two quotes were exclusive (they are not) it still would not be "my own contradiction" because one is a statement made by another person.
So do you ever have any thoughts of your own or do you need to wait for me to have one so you can just repeat it back to me? I am very sorry your reading comprehension is so poor, and your knowledge of your own ideology is so lacking that you are unable to see those quotes are not contradictory, but maybe if you imagine it hard enough... |
|
|
|
What is some one on the street who was just assaulted by one or more people he does not know and then chased supposed to assume, that they just wanted to have a little chat with him? He was assaulted, he tried to get away from the assailant(s), they chased him. Self defense is perfectly justified. He was in fact physically assaulted, hitting someones head to knock of his hat is assault, this is where the criminal activity began. This is an illegal form of physical aggression unless you are insinuating they yelled loud enough to make his hat fly off. I have no problem with him being charged with having the sword, but by no means should he be charged for defending himself from assault.
Following your explanation, I just have to insult you and your mother and wife strong and long enough to make you angry enough so you push me then I can cut your hand with a sword. If you don't see a problem here, you're the problem. Words are not physical assault. Hitting some one is. Try again fat man. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
